What -is- INTP?

[Artsu Tharaz]

So, now that MBTI is dead, and an alternate Typology has taken its place, leaving the 'INTP' alone, it seems the INTP label is now an essential ghost town. No one lives there any more, so we can storm the place at will and run it however we want.

I am here putting it on watch - we've claimed it now - but we should bide our time a bit before we decide how to run the place. Just remember that it is ours now, and not any authority above us.

What does the INTP represent basically? Well, somewhat how the test frames it.
- does not readily project themselves into the environment
- is concerned with the abstract world, and not the physical,
- is concerned with the conceptial world, and not the social,
- not possessing the required discipline level for societal life

Essentially, it is what world we are in, -NOT- how we naturally are as a person. You -can- choose to be INTP or anything else, because it is just a description of the world you are in at the time. However, no one may claim to be an INTP authority. They can only make arguments for a different conceptualisation, and await the vote, i.e. it shall be democratic.

So, what is the INTP?
It is not an innate characteristic, but a descrition of the focus on a particular world, as approximated by the flexible label of introverted, intuitive, thinking, perceiving.

It shares more in common with the Big 5 than it does with function based Typology, but allows for a greater complexity in structure by fixing certain characteristics (and leaves neuroticness out, because that is a destructive dimension which only hinders emotional expression).

So we define INTP in terms of a world, and leave membership open. We can explore into this world, but need not set its span of people fixed. Options are left open.

Are you an INTP?

 

[pjoa09]

I refuse INTPhood.

No but really. Even while trying to set these parameters for INTP. I find a question.

What is abstract?
What is concept?

Can you explain abstract without being abstract?
Can you explain the concept of concept while not using concepts?

Typo on third test frame.

A very perceiving idea.


I think Big 5 is a better description albeit, quite short and obvious.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

I refuse INTPhood.

No but really. Even while trying to set these parameters for INTP. I find a question.

What is abstract?
What is concept?

Can you explain abstract without being abstract?
Can you explain the concept of concept while not using concepts?

Typo on third test frame.

A very perceiving idea.


I think Big 5 is a better description albeit, quite short and obvious.

The meaning is flexible, we decide our own.

Big 5 doesn't have the elegant structure which Typology has.

What word better describes what we mean by N rather than S, or T rather than F, or P rather than J, or I rather than E?

 

[pjoa09]

Why do we need those functions? Or why don't we have even more functions? The more I introspect the more I see we can't just be abstract or physical. I see myself using abstract as a tool to look at reality. Like a tracing paper.

Still ain't sure why I do what I do. I don't think anyone else was or is sure.

 

[Words]

This reeks of ideology..

I prefer reality. (which is that INTP is a type of "temperament", as it is originally introduced as).

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

This reeks of ideology..

I prefer reality. (which is that INTP is a type of "temperament", as it is originally introduced as).

y so serious?

I just figure we should clarify the meaning of the term a bit, lest it be thrown out for good. What was the point of it anyway?

 

[pjoa09]

This reeks of ideology..

I prefer reality. (which is that INTP is a type of "temperament", as it is originally introduced as).

Preference to reality over abstract you say?

ISTP!

I consider this as a foresight thread. Trying to predict what may eventually be the populace of INTPf.

 

[Oblivious]

I do not think that it matters to a layman such as I what INTP really means. This could be a forum for Harry Potter lookalikes for all I care, and it does not matter to me whether the posters really look like Harry Potter according to whoever cares to define it.

The point is that I like the conversations and the discussions, and that is the only criteria for my continued presence here.

Spoiler

I have never considered the INTP profile as a template for my behaviour. My identification with the label of INTP only went as far as how much I felt the profile described me. I can say this for a lot of profiles, but INTP and INTJ most of all.

I in fact can be highly disciplined, am able to set goals, have a great deal of empathy for those I have relationships with, am highly practical, and am able to effectively motivate people in a leadership position (By commanding positive morale).

I still have trouble understanding emotions certain people have, but once I understand their motivations, it becomes quite easy. The biggest problem I have is behaving in certain ways casually. I am good at getting my point across to anyone because I can focus, but it does not make me an extrovert.

Does it matter what INTP means? To who does it matter? Why?

 

[Jelly Rev]

Does it matter what INTP means? To who does it matter? Why?

yes it is a uniting concept among similar ppl whom have behaviors that if plotted among the normal population would be have a bell curve not in the same position for certain measurements such as the Big 5, perhaps IQ, perhaps EI, among others.
This general concept of what an INTP is unites a group of people by providing a degree of perceived similarity hence certainty and comfortablility, this is a good thing for creating a cohesive group of folk. Also knowing that similar minded folk are around us we can expect to see things similar to what/how we would think hence making it easier to facilitate discussions...rather than having some person who does not understand our way of thinking come in and ruin it.

Also using INTP as a banner is a way to attract people of a more similar nature rather than different.

Lastly using INTP as a unification banner keeps out those pesky SJ's

 

[Words]

y so serious?

I just figure we should clarify the meaning of the term a bit, lest it be thrown out for good. What was the point of it anyway?

Yeah, but this is just like one of those nationalistic tendencies. Clarify meaning based on proof and evidence, not on political unification. It goes against the principle of truth and open-mindedness.

Preference to reality over abstract you say?

ISTP!

I consider this as a foresight thread. Trying to predict what may eventually be the populace of INTPf.

It's Ni. It's idealogical. ISTP has Ni for tertiary function; it's actually more ISTP. This thread, that is.

I do not think that it matters to a layman such as I what INTP really means. This could be a forum for Harry Potter lookalikes for all I care, and it does not matter to me whether the posters really look like Harry Potter according to whoever cares to define it.

exactly.

The point is that I like the conversations and the discussions, and that is the only criteria for my continued presence here.

exactly.

yes it is a uniting concept among similar ppl whom have behaviors that if plotted among the normal population would be have a bell curve not in the same position for certain measurements such as the Big 5, perhaps IQ, perhaps EI, among others.
This general concept of what an INTP is unites a group of people by providing a degree of perceived similarity hence certainty and comfortablility, this is a good thing for creating a cohesive group of folk. Also knowing that similar minded folk are around us we can expect to see things similar to what/how we would think hence making it easier to facilitate discussions...rather than having some person who does not understand our way of thinking come in and ruin it.

Also using INTP as a banner is a way to attract people of a more similar nature rather than different.

Lastly using INTP as a unification banner keeps out those pesky SJ's

Typing is never certain, especially with the quality of typists we have in this forum. It's great to identify what INTP "truly" is but what just happens is like this thread right here. The "unifying" detail is far from accurate and what we get is actually a unification of a type who only "thinks" their INTP. Besides, variety of mindsets is an excellent experience. tolerance is key.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

It's Ni. It's idealogical.

I can't help it.

I just feel clarification at this point will be necessary.

We can at this point make any change we wish, if it will prove useful - pragmatism is the purpose of the label to begin with, which means addressing the purpose of the label may be necessary.

Perhaps one alternative I wish to stress is for the label to -not- be defined in terms of innate characteristics of the person, but to be more defined in methodology - a kind of totally detached methodology, akin simply to science, though varied as required.

It's great to identify what INTP "truly" is but what just happens is like this thread right here.

Well, this was more of a counter-act against the "truly Type X" notion.

If you want variety of mindsets then you should make that explicit. INTP should be more of a project rather than a personal label.

 

[pjoa09]

Typing is never certain, especially with the quality of typists we have in this forum. It's great to identify what INTP "truly" is but what just happens is like this thread right here. The "unifying" detail is far from accurate and what we get is actually a unification of a type who only "thinks" their INTP. Besides, variety of mindsets is an excellent experience. tolerance is key.

At least no one tells you to stop thinking!

"you are thinking too much."
"don't think just do!"
"why to think so much?"
"where are you? in dream world?"

I get none of it here!

 

[Lobstrich]

Spoiler

So, now that MBTI is dead, and an alternate Typology has taken its place, leaving the 'INTP' alone, it seems the INTP label is now an essential ghost town. No one lives there any more, so we can storm the place at will and run it however we want.

I am here putting it on watch - we've claimed it now - but we should bide our time a bit before we decide how to run the place. Just remember that it is ours now, and not any authority above us.

What does the INTP represent basically? Well, somewhat how the test frames it.
- does not readily project themselves into the environment
- is concerned with the abstract world, and not the physical,
- is concerned with the conceptial world, and not the social,
- not possessing the required discipline level for societal life

Essentially, it is what world we are in, -NOT- how we naturally are as a person. You -can- choose to be INTP or anything else, because it is just a description of the world you are in at the time. However, no one may claim to be an INTP authority. They can only make arguments for a different conceptualisation, and await the vote, i.e. it shall be democratic.

So, what is the INTP?
It is not an innate characteristic, but a descrition of the focus on a particular world, as approximated by the flexible label of introverted, intuitive, thinking, perceiving.

It shares more in common with the Big 5 than it does with function based Typology, but allows for a greater complexity in structure by fixing certain characteristics (and leaves neuroticness out, because that is a destructive dimension which only hinders emotional expression).

So we define INTP in terms of a world, and leave membership open. We can explore into this world, but need not set its span of people fixed. Options are left open.

Are you an INTP?

Lol. Sounds like anarchy to me.

Sarcastic as this thread is, I like it. It's very open minded!

 

[Lobstrich]

Preference to reality over abstract you say?

ISTP!

I consider this as a foresight thread. Trying to predict what may eventually be the populace of INTPf.

I see where this thread is going... Where have you gotten the inspiration for such jokes?!

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

If you are ISTP, but you are fine with keeping the ideas theoretical, then feel free to stay. If you are INFP but prepared to let your values be questioned and keep an open mind, then stay. If you are INJ but prepared keep everything P and not push people towards particular goals (yes, I'm aware of the irony), then feel free to stay.

Whatever type you happen to 'truly' be, so long as you are true to the INTP code of honour while you're here, you are welcome in the INTP zone.

It's time to bring in the ENTJ.

 

[Words]

Bullshit.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Bullshit.

Quite informative.

 

[Decaf]

Cool story bro.

At risk of missing the spirit of the thread I had some thoughts...

"INTP" as a title is really two things. The first is shorthand for a Jungian personality construct based on how the human brain evolves to address its environment. There is debate at whether the primary motivator is genetic or environmental, but most experts believe it is fundamental rather than superficial. Two people can share a set of fundamentals and yet appear very different based on the habits and behaviors that have grown up around them.

The second is a label. Like most labels it serves to create a smaller community out of a larger one. As introverts its both attractive and necessary in allowing us to interact with people; using various labels to help us keep track of relationship dynamics (e.g. family, friend, enemy, coworker, bowling buddy, police officer). In this sense INTP is an especially useful label because it allows some expectation of interpersonal dynamics with regard to strangers. The appeal is very similar to that of astrological signs, but with significantly more scientific evidence (though not sufficient to be accepted without qualifications).

Describing "INTP" as a external set of behaviors is inaccurate. If it were the case, then I agree that you could choose to be whatever you like, but the theory behind the title describes a set of psychological characteristics that help you decide what you will care about. Observed commonalities like verbal precision, intellectual distractibility or innate talent with pattern recognition. If you are operating with the same assumptions as those who originated the theory I think you must conclude that their is no motivation strong enough to cause someone to rewrite their psychological fundamentals without first breaking the existing construct through physical damage to the brain (e.g. a stroke).

 

[Lobstrich]

Quite informative.

LOL

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Cool story bro.

At risk of missing the spirit of the thread I had some thoughts...

"INTP" as a title is really two things. The first is shorthand for a Jungian personality construct based on how the human brain evolves to address its environment. There is debate at whether the primary motivator is genetic or environmental, but most experts believe it is fundamental rather than superficial. Two people can share a set of fundamentals and yet appear very different based on the habits and behaviors that have grown up around them.

The second is a label. Like most labels it serves to create a smaller community out of a larger one. As introverts its both attractive and necessary in allowing us to interact with people; using various labels to help us keep track of relationship dynamics (e.g. family, friend, enemy, coworker, bowling buddy, police officer). In this sense INTP is an especially useful label because it allows some expectation of interpersonal dynamics with regard to strangers. The appeal is very similar to that of astrological signs, but with significantly more scientific evidence (though not sufficient to be accepted without qualifications).

Describing "INTP" as a external set of behaviors is inaccurate. If it were the case, then I agree that you could choose to be whatever you like, but the theory behind the title describes a set of psychological characteristics that help you decide what you will care about. Observed commonalities like verbal precision, intellectual distractibility or innate talent with pattern recognition. If you are operating with the same assumptions as those who originated the theory I think you must conclude that their is no motivation strong enough to cause someone to rewrite their psychological fundamentals without first breaking the existing construct through physical damage to the brain (e.g. a stroke).

Perhaps the spirit of the thread is that INTP should be regarded as a spirit?

 

[Decaf]

Perhaps the spirit of the thread is that INTP should be regarded as a spirit?

Or perhaps its a thread and we should weave it into a sweater.

*edit*

I believe I can see where you're going with the thought, but the problem is that INTP already has a definition. If you're sharing an observation that you think is specific to people like those in this community then please do, but it doesn't invalidate the original definition.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

A change is coming, I can sense it in the air.

Arrrrr.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

Canned Heat - A Change Is Gonna Come / Leaving This Town - YouTube

 

[Words]

Quite informative.

Yes, it is actually. The workings of an INTP is found in seeking truth(Ti) and creativity(Ne), as oppose to agenda and exclusivity. What you have laid here is a foundation of falsehood and close-mindedness aimed not at truths, arguments nor creation but at mere agenda, hence, "Bullshit". Contradiction, to be precise.

 

[Jelly Rev]

Besides, variety of mindsets is an excellent experience. tolerance is key.

There's only two things I hate in this world. People who are intolerant of other people's cultures and the Dutch.

 

[pjoa09]

Yes, it is actually. The workings of an INTP is found in seeking truth(Ti) and creativity(Ne), as oppose to agenda and exclusivity. What you have laid here is a foundation of falsehood and close-mindedness aimed not at truths, arguments nor creation but at mere agenda, hence, "Bullshit". Contradiction, to be precise.

So Artsu is EXTJing our INTPf?

In all humor, you should be more open-minded towards close-mindedness.

But really, we need some J out here.

At least I need J-ify.

Gotta have some morals, some organization, some yelling at embiciles without questioning whether I have the right to yell at them since I haven't employed them.

I know I can't, but it's pretty tough rolling with you Pness hanging out in public.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

I'll say no more.

 

[Words]

In all humor, you should be more open-minded towards close-mindedness.

In all humor, Is that even possible? (specifically, if close-mindedness was aimed at open-mindedness)

But really, we need some J out here.

At least I need J-ify.

Gotta have some morals, some organization, some yelling at embiciles without questioning whether I have the right to yell at them since I haven't employed them.

I know I can't, but it's pretty tough rolling with you Pness hanging out in public.

There are no imbeciles here, at least the majority of the members I believe. Forced order is only necessary when the majority is without independent thinking and critical thought, like most of the nations out there. Otherwise, forced order only impedes critical thinking. This is a forum powered by individuals but rules are more than the technical and the legal; there is the informal and social.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

You don't get it, Words. ):

I wasn't trying to spread any ideology, that's just how I communicate my ideas.

I don't know what aspects will be important for you, so I just say it as I see it.

 

[Words]

You don't get it, Words. ):

I wasn't trying to spread any ideology, that's just how I communicate my ideas.

I don't know what aspects will be important for you, so I just say it as I see it.

yeah, but this is also the way I communicate. I criticize ideas that I believe are false. ideology or not, it doesn't matter.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

yeah, but this is also the way I communicate. I criticize ideas that I believe are false. ideology or not, it doesn't matter.

This is a very nice quote in itself for understanding how Ti works.

Socionics-wise, this actually results in Nw base, with Tb creative. Basically, INTPs touch on the real world through intuition, and they actively process this through cleansing by thinking.

If you can visualise this situation, you can see the clear Ne in the externalising of the intuition, and and clear Nj in its continuous character. Such a combination must result in a passive, rather than active process. We have associated a T function, which can act in jumps, and is an introverting (compressing) kind. So it is Tip, which is active, and thus we have the Tip Nej

 

[scorpiomover]

So, now that MBTI is dead,

Sorry? I must have missed the memo. Care to provide some info to explain, and a link as a source?

and an alternate Typology has taken its place,

What "alternate Typology"? Again, links would be most helpful to me, to keep me informed.

 

[Decaf]

Sorry? I must have missed the memo. Care to provide some info to explain, and a link as a source?

No memo. Typology is fine. He's talking about his observations in a different part of the psyche from what MBTI references.

 

[scorpiomover]

Still don't understand why MBTI is dead.

But, on the other hand, I would agree that those who come here, seem to have a heck of a lot in common, effectively allowing us to figure out what that commonality is, right from the start.

However, I know myself. I'm great at improving an existing structure, and for finding weaknesses and errors in an existing structure. I'm not so great at starting from scratch. So I'll try to work with what Artsu Tharaz wrote.

I am here putting it on watch - we've claimed it now - but we should bide our time a bit before we decide how to run the place. Just remember that it is ours now, and not any authority above us.

Don't like to be the boss. From what I've read, neither does any other INTP. However, someone needs to be the boss. If we are really in charge, then might I suggest a rotating Presidency? Something like fixed-term elections? At least until we manage to come up with a better method of government than democracy?

What does the INTP represent basically? Well, somewhat how the test frames it.
- does not readily project themselves into the environment
- is concerned with the abstract world, and not the physical,
- is concerned with the conceptial world, and not the social,
- not possessing the required discipline level for societal life

Essentially, it is what world we are in, -NOT- how we naturally are as a person. You -can- choose to be INTP or anything else, because it is just a description of the world you are in at the time.

I agree there, at least in part. Over the last couple of months, I have been coming to the same conclusion myself, that being an INTP is a choice, more than just being fixed.

I think that for myself, that I was leaning towards being an INTP naturally, ever since I was a child. However, at some point in my life, I realised that I LIKED being an INTP. I LIKED being the characteristics that are associated with an INTP, long before I heard of MBTI. So I agree that being an INTP can be a matter of choice, and I prefer that definition.

In this vein, I also discovered something else. When I say a negative, what I am NOT, then this tends to focus my mind on my limitations, and this tends to make me think of lack of options. When I say a positive, it is much harder, because to state what something IS, I have to be clear about what exactly I am talking about. The result is that I have to really think about what the statement really means. This gives my statements clarity. Also, I find that when I state things positively, this focusses my mind on what I CAN do, and this leads my mind to think of how I can those things for my benefit. So overall, I prefer a positive set of statements about what an INTP is.

So, I prefer the following to frame an INTP:

Introvert - I PREFER to live in my imagination and ideas, much more than having to deal with the harsh rigidity of social conformity.

Intuitive - I PREFER to think about the abstract world, and come up with my own ideas, that solve problems completely, rather than just going with "the done thing", that only gives a partial solution

Thinker - I PREFER to think about the conceptual world, as it is more exact, rather than deal with nebulous feelings.

Perceptive - I PREFER to leave my decisions as open as possible, so that I am covered, no matter what reality brings me.

However, no one may claim to be an INTP authority. They can only make arguments for a different conceptualisation, and await the vote, i.e. it shall be democratic.

I agree. However, even when it comes to the definition, I want fixed-term democracy. That is, I want the decision of what an INTP is, to be able to be changed later on, to cover ourselves for all cases. But I also recognise the need for an agreed definition. My solution is that the decisions are made by vote, but that when we vote, we also decide when we will vote next on that decision, if we keep that definition, or change it for some different one.

What does everyone think?

 

[nanook]

we are all perceivers.

it's only that Pness means something different to us, because we perceive differently.

a healthy mind mixes judgement and perception in what might be deemed as equal parts. well, the parts can't really be quantified like a substance. but the point is, that in the healthy mind judgement makes no attempt of reducing/excluding perception beyond a manageable amount, and perception makes no attempt to over-flood any attempts of creating judgement. the balance is automatic, no addition of subjective/intentional preference or conscious attitude is needed.

so, except for the unhealthy ones, who not only exclude perception and who also are aware of this exclusion and admit to it (those are very few people), i don't see why anyone (any statistically significant amount of individuals) would be UNwilling to identify with a concept of Pness in concept of his type-description,

unless they have a more specific idea of how Pness manifests in others and differ from it, and they may have gotten such an idea from observing any amount of potentially mistyped people who project any amount of different Pness cliches.

which implies that any type could choose to 'unlike' the concept of Pness in context of his identity.

some may feel that perception is more integral to them, than it is to others, because they remember times early in development when they used to be rather unconscious about their judgement, i am talking about dominant perceivers, while others used to emphasize judgement outspokenly, i am talking about dominant judgers.

but the latter are unlikely to remember a time, when they used to be unconscious of their perception. everyone perceives a whole lot of reality after all. the concept of being unconscious about perception is just very difficult to grasp. you don't see what you don't see, especially not meta-qualities of perception (like introversion/subjectivity).

add the fact, that the subjective factor of introverted perception is rather unconscious initially, not as such, but conceptually, meaning the child may have no concept of being subjective, although he witnesses subjectively, or he may have no concept of others being less indulged into the process of creating perception. plus the fact, that there is an element of avoidance of specific experience in subjective perception.

the last two fact's potentially reduces a dominant perceiver's confidence that his perception is utterly integral to his nature.

which makes the score more even.

i mean, the likeliness of J dominant or P dominant people obsessing about ownership of the Pness concept as part of their 4 letter code.

everyone wants it, not everyone is absolutely confident that he has deserved it. (that an emphasis of this aspect of him is justified in a 4 letter code)

the rest is arbitrary choice.

the individual may deny his doubt and insist on Pness or he may give up on Pness to avoid a doubt-based choice/ownership.
or he may leave it up to chance, allow the external world to shape his view of what Pness is and choose based on that.
but the external world projects random traits as supposed Pness, which is why his result will be a matter of chance.
now i begin to repeat myself....

 

[pjoa09]

In all humor, Is that even possible? (specifically, if close-mindedness was aimed at open-mindedness)

Yes it is.

For example everyone knows how close-minded Hitler was. He killed many Jews. Instead of dismissing him close-minded you should investigate his ludicrous ideas. Are Jews evil? Do Jews really make money off of everyone? Why does Hitler hate Jews really? Another example could be for racist. Maybe they have a point. Lots of blacks are involved in murders and it might be.



I am not saying whatever they did is okay. But to be investigative towards close-minded people.

It's not strictly 'open-mindedness to close-mindedness' but rather not dismissing the ludicrous ideas that close-minded people bring up and actually look into it.

It's not Star Wars where you have to fear being seduced and molested by it. (ref. dark side, also little humor there)

There are no imbeciles here, at least the majority of the members I believe. Forced order is only necessary when the majority is without independent thinking and critical thought, like most of the nations out there. Otherwise, forced order only impedes critical thinking. This is a forum powered by individuals but rules are more than the technical and the legal; there is the informal and social.

Yeah I was being a bit self-centered here. I am not talking about the forum. The forum is awesome. I have never actually had a right to come up with stupid shit and actually experience it being criticized. Normally I leave them to myself. No one even comes up with stuff half interesting as this.

There is a world with flocks of sheep and charging rhinos. I honestly think yelling could do great where I am. I have to compete against screaming chimpanzees and baboons. It requires alertness, authority, and hot-blooded anger. All of which are strangers to me no matter how much I try to familiarize.

I think I typo-ed in the last post "At least I need to J-ify."
Maybe that is how you came to that misunderstanding.

Regarding other posts:
I am going with scorpiomover's frame. It's quite test-like and easier to relate to.

The real definitions of the functions is a bit hard to understand. I am just saying that they often relate to abilities and not on habits. I don't have much confidence on my abilities but I know what I like to do most of time.

 

[Words]

Yes it is.

For example everyone knows how close-minded Hitler was. He killed many Jews. Instead of dismissing him close-minded you should investigate his ludicrous ideas. Are Jews evil? Do Jews really make money off of everyone? Why does Hitler hate Jews really? Another example could be for racist. Maybe they have a point. Lots of blacks are involved in murders and it might be.

That is something else. You're talking about perception, not the very definition of "close-mindedness." In other words, you're talking about "perceived close-mindedness." Strictly speaking, it is not possible.

and I think you misperceive, I am not against all ideas. I am against ideas that I have investigated and found illogical. In terms of Hitler and Racism, I think I have enough proof and evidence to regard it as strictly 'close-minded.'

The real definitions of the functions is a bit hard to understand. I am just saying that they often relate to abilities and not on habits. I don't have much confidence on my abilities but I know what I like to do most of time.

My suggestion is to relate reality to it, and have reality explain it to you. In my opinion, it's quite evident. The way we communicate, the meanings we focus on, etc. Habits, hobbies, abilities? not so much.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

I think that was a subtle troll. I forget now.

 

[pjoa09]

That is something else. You're talking about perception, not the very definition of "close-mindedness." In other words, you're talking about "perceived close-mindedness." Strictly speaking, it is not possible.

and I think you misperceive, I am not against all ideas. I am against ideas that I have investigated and found illogical. In terms of Hitler and Racism, I think I have enough proof and evidence to regard it as strictly 'close-minded.'

I guess it's just a matter of opinions at this point. You investigated and deemed it close-minded. I investigated and deemed it somewhat close-minded and authoritative but had a good look out.

I mentioned it was not strictly 'open minded to close minded'.

My suggestion is to relate reality to it, and have reality explain it to you. In my opinion, it's quite evident. The way we communicate, the meanings we focus on, etc. Habits, hobbies, abilities? not so much.

Yes, but for example they would say 'Using introverted Thinking is like having an internal sense of the essential qualities of something, noticing the fine distinctions that make it what it is and then naming it.'. It sounds pretty clear as a concept but when you introspect, the whole sentence just falls apart. You are sitting there recalling past events and learning that you don't always notice fine distinctions and find 'internal sense of the essential qualities of something' a complete jargon.

 

[Words]

I guess it's just a matter of opinions at this point. You investigated and deemed it close-minded. I investigated and deemed it somewhat close-minded and authoritative but had a good look out.

I don't think it's about opinions; I think it's about the math. Does your opinion contradict or not? Does mine contradict?

An idea requires proof immediately before consideration because there are an unlimited amount of ideas to equally consider. Therefore, things like "deconstruction", "methodological skepticism"(as per Descartes) is most logical mindset.

Yes, but for example they would say 'Using introverted Thinking is like having an internal sense of the essential qualities of something, noticing the fine distinctions that make it what it is and then naming it.'. It sounds pretty clear as a concept but when you introspect, the whole sentence just falls apart. You are sitting there recalling past events and learning that you don't always notice fine distinctions and find 'internal sense of the essential qualities of something' a complete jargon.

i think it's pretty graspable. It's like what I did back there. I told you that you were talking about "perceived close-mindedness" not close-mindedness itself. Two very distinct objects.

 

[pjoa09]

I don't think it's about opinions; I think it's about the math. Does your opinion contradict or not? Does mine contradict?

An idea requires proof immediately before consideration because there are an unlimited amount of ideas to equally consider. Therefore, things like "deconstruction", "methodological skepticism"(as per Descartes) is most logical mindset.

In my perspective this is the timeline:

Artsu shares an idea of redefining INTP. The act itself is humor to me. Obviously you can't redefine what has been defined.

You call "bullshit".

I request(I said 'should' unintentionally) you to investigate and perceive narrow-mindedness.
I share a note that Judging can be helpful.

You explain that you have judged antisemitic people and racists as close-minded.You judge this thread topic as close-minded. (fair point, but my point was to wonder what fuels close-mindedness, it's not sufficient to say they are just dumb asses)

I say its opinions.

You say its math.

I am still going to call misunderstandings and opinions. I am starting to get more and more confused what is this all about as well.

Maybe I didn't approach the thread topic for consideration?

i think it's pretty graspable. It's like what I did back there. I told you that you were talking about "perceived close-mindedness" not close-mindedness itself. Two very distinct objects.

Fair point about it be graspable through communication.(except introversion?)

But here is what is really blowing up my head.

OP comes up with a new definition of INTP (though not possible) that is less restrictive than the originally conceived definition of INTP. Then simply states what is happening now. (IMO) Shows desire to 'protect INTP'.

You call bullshit and close-mindedness.

I understand bullshit now to a certain point. However if it is defined INTP as the populace of INTPf then he is simply stating what is going on now at INTPf. (not so strict moderators and lots of random people joining in)

Some say there are very few INTPs and more of people who just enjoy discussion. I'd agree for me. I so far have never been able to confirm myself as a true INTP by the original MBTI or Socionic definition. I always think I could be ISTP until some description is terribly wrong. Same goes for INTP. "INTPs value knowledge above all else. " is wrong for me. I value independence and the freedom to do whatever the hell I want to do.

Sorry, I derail quite a bit.

 

[Words]

In my perspective this is the timeline:

Artsu shares an idea of redefining INTP. The act itself is humor to me. Obviously you can't redefine what has been defined.

You call "bullshit".

I request(I said 'should' unintentionally) you to investigate and perceive narrow-mindedness.
I share a note that Judging can be helpful.

You explain that you have judged antisemitic people and racists as close-minded.You judge this thread topic as close-minded. (fair point, but my point was to wonder what fuels close-mindedness, it's not sufficient to say they are just dumb asses)

I say its opinions.

You say its math.

I am still going to call misunderstandings and opinions. I am starting to get more and more confused what is this all about as well.

Maybe I didn't approach the thread topic for consideration?

Thanks for the recap.

I was speaking generally when you started talking about considering what may seem to be close-minded; the thread only serves as an example. Anyways, I would still say that it's not just about opinions. Opinions only linger in values and aesthetics. Ideas such as "Jews are evil" or "African-Americans are violent" are not about opinions. If we assume these ideas are false and I continue to disagree and believe the ideas mentioned, then I am simply incorrect and close-minded. As a whole, you can question logic but then questioning would be based on logic itself so its sort of irrelevant.

Fair point about it be graspable through communication.(except introversion?)

what about introversion?

But here is what is really blowing up my head.

OP comes up with a new definition of INTP (though not possible) that is less restrictive than the originally conceived definition of INTP. Then simply states what is happening now. (IMO) Shows desire to 'protect INTP'.

How is it less restrictive? Is he really stating what is happening or simply his own opinions? Where did his definition come from? What's the point of "protection"? Who wants protection? Why is he protecting an unknown idea?(which, in my opinion, is false and is only meant for an agenda, which makes it dishonest)

I understand bullshit now to a certain point. However if it is defined INTP as the populace of INTPf then he is simply stating what is going on now at INTPf. (not so strict moderators and lots of random people joining in)

I don't think he's simply stating what is going on "now." He's presenting an idea.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Sorry, I derail quite a bit.

No, I think it was the most on topic post so far.

I think you basically summed up what I meant.

However if it is defined INTP as the populace of INTPf then he is simply stating what is going on now at INTPf. (not so strict moderators and lots of random people joining in)

though this isn't strictly what I was saying, but this is the basic effect, and what I meant was probably too Ni'd up to be useful to most people here. I think INTP as a theoretical construct should be left as it is. I don't think we need to say that each person is an embodiment of that construct, just that we are collecting around it as a focal point for discussion (some will embody it more than others, and they will naturally be more prominent in the community).

 

[pjoa09]

I was speaking generally when you started talking about considering what may seem to be close-minded; the thread only serves as an example. Anyways, I would still say that it's not just about opinions. Opinions only linger in values and aesthetics. Ideas such as "Jews are evil" or "African-Americans are violent" are not about opinions. If we assume these ideas are false and I continue to disagree and believe the ideas mentioned, then I am simply incorrect and close-minded. As a whole, you can question logic but then questioning would be based on logic itself so its sort of irrelevant.

You mean continue to not believe the ideas mentioned? That would be close-minded? I was more familiar with the other stereotype like Jews are smart and Africans are well-built. Which could come in handy when actually dealing with them. Very racist thing to say but I think you'd be more often right with that stereotype than popping in with an open-mind and trying to ready yourself for a Jewish NBA basketball player and an African American Nuclear Physicist. Highly racist and very close-minded thing to say but I am putting this out for criticism. Don't swear at me or judge me for it. I got that once.

what about introversion?

Hard to judge whether you are dealing with an introvert or extrovert just by communication because you are already communicating. Unless if you have any ideas. The best I got is try to judge if he refers to his intuition/senses more or to logic/feelings more.Very vague.

How is it less restrictive? Is he really stating what is happening or simply his own opinions? Where did his definition come from? What's the point of "protection"? Who wants protection? Why is he protecting an unknown idea?(which, in my opinion, is false and is only meant for an agenda, which makes it dishonest)

His parameters are clearly more loose. They were loose enough from the start and gradually even loosened up even more. His 'test frames' weren't very specific or focused. At least compared to the three or four essay that are floating around on the web. Some of which, contradict each other. (typelogic vs. personality page ref. school for ISTP)

You can't state what is happening so to speak you can only say how you have perceived what has been happening. I'd agree with it. I am finding difficulties in MBTI.

The next two questions I don't actually understand as well. I don't know who would take up authority against an INTP. I can't even take up authority against myself. (self-discipline,vaguely)

I don't think he's simply stating what is going on "now." He's presenting an idea.

That is also actually confusing. It starts of as sort of an agenda, but an agenda that is complete. No one bothers trying to be boss. People just come and go on this forum. It is an observation claiming to be an agenda.

I really see it as what is going on now. I see ideas pouring in and this forum finds its root with questioning rather than INTPs explaining their problems while being an INTP.

INTPf seems like a place full of formulated ideas and questions that await criticism and feedback. Questions regarding being an INTP are not the main focus.

 

[Words]

You mean continue to not believe the ideas mentioned? That would be close-minded? I was more familiar with the other stereotype like Jews are smart and Africans are well-built. Which could come in handy when actually dealing with them. Very racist thing to say but I think you'd be more often right with that stereotype than popping in with an open-mind and trying to ready yourself for a Jewish NBA basketball player and an African American Nuclear Physicist. Highly racist and very close-minded thing to say but I am putting this out for criticism. Don't swear at me or judge me for it. I got that once.

Useful because we live in a temporal reality where there is a grey area, but it is not true. Maybe if you changed it into "Many* Jews are X" instead of absolutes, it would be more truthful as well as more useful.

Hard to judge whether you are dealing with an introvert or extrovert just by communication because you are already communicating. Unless if you have any ideas. The best I got is try to judge if he refers to his intuition/senses more or to logic/feelings more.Very vague.

I just go with their level of responsiveness(side from Ne doms) and compare that to the average. If it goes under the line, then more likely Introvert. I have a numerical estimation in my head for response/time, sort of. I believe what helps most is experience, beginning with yourself as a standard and relating that to everyone else. Other than that, it's about the functions. There are many different E and I functions, so it's all about relating them all together to form the most logical idea.

His parameters are clearly more loose. They were loose enough from the start and gradually even loosened up even more. His 'test frames' weren't very specific or focused. At least compared to the three or four essay that are floating around on the web. Some of which, contradict each other. (typelogic vs. personality page ref. school for ISTP)

You can't state what is happening so to speak you can only say how you have perceived what has been happening. I'd agree with it. I am finding difficulties in MBTI.

The next two questions I don't actually understand as well. I don't know who would take up authority against an INTP. I can't even take up authority against myself. (self-discipline,vaguely)

That is also actually confusing. It starts of as sort of an agenda, but an agenda that is complete. No one bothers trying to be boss. People just come and go on this forum. It is an observation claiming to be an agenda.

That is interesting. I see it as an idea without any basis, specifically the "What is an INTP" section. I do not think descriptions help at all. I think they only limit type extensively and most importantly, removes the "sense" of typology.

I really see it as what is going on now. I see ideas pouring in and this forum finds its root with questioning rather than INTPs explaining their problems while being an INTP.

INTPf seems like a place full of formulated ideas and questions that await criticism and feedback. Questions regarding being an INTP are not the main focus.

I don't think you can limit anything to what is now. A philosophy like that hinders change and development; it rejects other notions of what something is. The reality of INTPforum is that it's simply a forum. Subjects/Topics change and they may change dramatically or not but it is still a forum. The current trend of topics is not only what it is about. It, as much as any other thing out there, has a natural ownership to what it can be as to what it is now. What i'm trying to say is still pretty vague to me but it is very similar to when cultures develop amongst nations. By confining yourself to the current culture, you lose sight of inventions and innovations. Absolute perspectives such as these also discriminate against the minority which, in this forum, includes the non-ideational topics.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Re: y'all are Gemini, just saiyan

Whatever may be may be.

Don't push an agenda, don't hold onto what there already is, just let the flow carry you away.

Gather to discuss ideas, or express yourself in whatever other way you want, just don't push, and don't hold back.

 

[pjoa09]

Useful because we live in a temporal reality where there is a grey area, but it is not true. Maybe if you changed it into "Many* Jews are X" instead of absolutes, it would be more truthful as well as more useful.

Agree.

I just go with their level of responsiveness(side from Ne doms) and compare that to the average. If it goes under the line, then more likely Introvert. I have a numerical estimation in my head for response/time, sort of. I believe what helps most is experience, beginning with yourself as a standard and relating that to everyone else. Other than that, it's about the functions. There are many different E and I functions, so it's all about relating them all together to form the most logical idea.

That does sound difficult. I am obviously introverted as a person but like you said probably 'Ne' doms tend to be confident when in a familiar topic and 'appear' more talkative.

That is interesting. I see it as an idea without any basis, specifically the "What is an INTP" section. I do not think descriptions help at all. I think they only limit type extensively and most importantly, removes the "sense" of typology.

I have to agree. I found very little highlight on their side in differentiating INTPs from ISTPs. Yet I see myself spilling into ISTP. The whole trying to predict what is wrong with something. I get such insights frequently. Albeit, I am very clumsy.

But isn't that the way its done? You use typology to define someone and try to see what is common with the people of that personality? Hence, essays?
I felt understood when I read the the essays. Then I studied MBTI and second guessed myself.

I don't think you can limit anything to what is now. A philosophy like that hinders change and development; it rejects other notions of what something is. The reality of INTPforum is that it's simply a forum. Subjects/Topics change and they may change dramatically or not but it is still a forum. The current trend of topics is not only what it is about. It, as much as any other thing out there, has a natural ownership to what it can be as to what it is now. What i'm trying to say is still pretty vague to me but it is very similar to when cultures develop amongst nations. By confining yourself to the current culture, you lose sight of inventions and innovations. Absolute perspectives such as these also discriminate against the minority which, in this forum, includes the non-ideational topics.

As an observation it isn't harmful. The tone of an agenda could be provocative such as in this case.

Everyone pops up once in a while wondering if we could put some ideas into motion. I suppose it's more of a personal thing than anything else. Once again, I could use some J. Be able to organize and put my ideas into motion. Build something.

 

[pjoa09]

Re: y'all are Gemini, just saiyan

Whatever may be may be.

Don't push an agenda, don't hold onto what there already is, just let the flow carry you away.

Gather to discuss ideas, or express yourself in whatever other way you want, just don't push, and don't hold back.

I hope reverse psychology doesn't prove itself! (imagine it without the storks, I thought the storks were individual emoticons)

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Re: im so high right now

I hope reverse psychology doesn't prove itself! (imagine it without the storks, I thought the storks were individual emoticons)

this post made me lolololololol

 

[Words]

That does sound difficult. I am obviously introverted as a person but like you said probably 'Ne' doms tend to be confident when in a familiar topic and 'appear' more talkative.

I have to agree. I found very little highlight on their side in differentiating INTPs from ISTPs. Yet I see myself spilling into ISTP. The whole trying to predict what is wrong with something. I get such insights frequently. Albeit, I am very clumsy.

Hmm.. maybe we can continue this discussion via PM.

But isn't that the way its done? You use typology to define someone and try to see what is common with the people of that personality? Hence, essays?
I felt understood when I read the the essays. Then I studied MBTI and second guessed myself.

Some people reference those essays, but I personally believe real observations should be the core basis. I mean, it's suppose to be a real concept in the first place.

From my understanding, books about MBTI normally start off with those descriptions and the Four letter system. Then they warn you about further complications and introduce the cognitive functions. Also historically, Myers Briggs gathered jung's functions and created that popular system. Based on this, I'd gather the effort was only to make the idea a little bit more understandable by the public.